About your Search

20130201
20130209
STATION
MSNBC 22
MSNBCW 22
FOXNEWS 10
CNN 5
CNNW 5
CSPAN 4
CSPAN2 3
KPIX (CBS) 2
WUSA (CBS) 2
KGO (ABC) 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 91
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 91 (some duplicates have been removed)
in washington are no more defensible than the path of wasteful and a responsible spending we've been on for decades. working families should come first. everyone agrees a fairer, simpler tax code would get all of us more time. in the attempt to make the tax code simpler, we must continue to demonstrate support for young parents who invest in having kids and raising a family. because after all, they are america's most valued investors. in 1997, republican congress created the child tax credit specifically to help ease the financial burden of families raising children. in 2001, it was expanded. such a policy helps to limit the size of government and results in fewer americans looking to the government for support. now leading up to april 15, families will be besieged by concerns over their taxes. but it's health care and the concern for a healthy family that always worries parents most. most americans have come to expect the best health care in the world, but there's no doubt that our current system is too complex and too costly. president obama's health care law resulted in higher pre
rid of the sequester as it relates to defense. i repeat, $2.6 trillion already all coming from nondefense. if we're going to have a sequester, defense is going to have to do their share. >> your position on lifting the sequester, on avoiding a government shutdown and on extending the debt limit beyond august is any one of those deals must include new revenues. >> and, yes, the answer is definitely yes. and i've got a pretty good fan base for that, the american people. republicans, democrats and independents. >> what do you say to the republicans who say that you're part of the problem here? john boehner, clearly you had words with him during the fiscal cliff negotiations. you called him a dictator. he said something i cannot repeat to you. and senator mcconnell in the end of the fiscal cliff negotiations needed to go around you so he could work with vice president biden. is there a breakdown between you and the republican leaders in congress? >> joe biden came here and spoke to us this week. had a good visit. i introduced him by saying sometimes there needs to be a good cop and
with another woman. but she says it was self-defense. and today she claimed that during their relationship he was using her. our adam housley has been monitoring the trial. adam, this thing just wrapped up for the week. where does it stand? >> well, it stands with her still on the stand, shepard, you know, the surprise a couple days ago that she took the stand at all in her defense. now she is still there and she will be back on monday with probably at least one more full day of the defense team neil, the defense team is going very methodical, going slow. explaining every single relationship she has had since high school. now talking about traverse alexander. at one point during testimony today she said she felt used after one of their very first encounters. >> i began to think well, i sent him a text message on monday. by that time he still didn't return any of those three attempts. so by that point, i was beginning to think that i had been very stupid and he got what he wanted and he wasn't interested in me anymore. >> again, the defense providing details by using her and her testimony basi
much, mike emanuel down on capitol hill today. jon: meantime outgoing defense secretary lee on panetta on capitol hill right now on the a hearing for the benghazi terror attack where he addressed the pentagon's response to the assault on our consulate on september 11th. four americans, including our ambassador to libya, died in that attack. this comes just a day after mr. panetta emotionally charged parting speech to students at georgetown university where he blasted the massive defense cuts known as the sequester, set to go into effect just weeks from now. >> if sequester happens, let me tell you some of the results. we will furlough as many as 800,000 dod civilians around the country for up to 22 days. they could face a 20% cut in their salary. you don't think that will impact on our economy? you don't think that's going to impact on jobs? you don't think that's going to impact on our ability to recover from the recession? jon: mr. panetta also deliver ad stark warning about the scale and scope of cyber attacks on this country saying they could cripple the united states. >> we are li
colleagues who wants to be defense secretary. >> were you right? yes-or-no answer? >> we will ask if chuck hagel's nomination is in trouble. our power player of the week, a cheerleader for poetry, all, right now, on fox news sunday. hello, again from fox news in washington, dc. president obama travels to minneapolis tomorrow to continue his push for new gun control. saturday, the white house released this picture of the president's shooting at camp david which he does all the time. the national rifle association is fighting new limits on guns. if the first big legislative battle this year and, today, we will cover it in depth. but, first, retired astronaut, mark kelly, husband of former congresswoman gabrielle giffords, shot two years ago. they have launch add new group "americans for responsible solutions." captain, let's start with your wife's drought testimony before a senate committee this week. >> you must act. be bold. be courageous. americans are counting on you. >>chris: how is your wife doing? >> great, chris. she enjoyed being there in front of the senate. it was a little bit of
, he is spushingpushing for his man to be the new secretary of defense. leon panetta was on "meet the press" yesterday commenting about chuck hagel's appearance last week in front of the senate foreign relations committee but first, leon defending hagel and said they weren't asking the most important questions. >> they talked a lot about post quotes. but what about when a secretary of defense is confronting today? what about the war on terrorism? the budget sequester? what about middle east turmoil? what about cyber attacks? all of the issue that con front a secretary of defense, we did not see enough time spent on discussing those issues and in the end, that's what counts. >> you are fully confident chuck hagel is prepared to take over? >> absolutely. >> bill: do you think he will get confirmed? what about tcmi hearing? i have seen chuck hagle. he used to be on crossfire. he is good under cross examination. >> let's talk about that. but yes, he is going to get confirmed. there are 55 democrats who are going to vote for him. two republicans have already
, this defensive player. of course, it wouldn't be national signing day with a little intrigue. it's gotten so weird and out of hand. all the kids have a press conference. they announce it on espn. alex collins had committed to arkansas but he could not make it official at his press conference. >> did you hear this, mika? >> because they couldn't find the letter of intent that he has to sign. where was it? his mother had taken and hidden it because she didn't want him to move so far from home to play for arkansas. >> great story. >> and said she wants him to stay close to home in florida and play for miami. the school couldn't talk about him because they hadn't signed him technically. his mom had hidden the letter because she didn't want him to leave home. >> i heard she came to school where he was going to have the press conference, grabbed the letter and ran home with it. >> you think he's going to hear about that for the rest of his life? mama took your letter. vanderbilt in the 19th best class. impossible. unheard of. james franklin is changing it. it's a whole new game. >> if stanford can
, it's important for us to make sure we've got a strong national defense and that we reduce our spending in a smart way. those of us who are luckiest in the society to close a few loopholes and deductions that the average american doesn't get. if that's the choice that we've got, i promise you we can win that debate because we're on the right side of this argument. i hope -- i expect that you guys will be with me on that. last point i'll make, obviously economic growth is a priority. making sure that we're opening up opportunity for everybody is also important. that's why emgregs reform is so critical. i said this is going to be a top priority and an early priority of my administration. i am heartened to see republicans and democrats starting to be in a serious conversation about getting this done. now is the time. i recognize that the politics aren't always easy. there are regionable variations. i understand that in some places this may end up being a tough issue, but what i also know is that part of our strength is our youth and our dynamism and our history of attracting talen
will start to kick in march 1st, taking a $55 billion bite out of this year's defense budget and $27 billion from domestic discretionary spending. according to the congressional budget office more than 1 million jobs are at risk. defense secretary leon panetta had this warning. >> we are going to weaken the united states and make it much more difficult to respond to the crisis in europe. >> reporter: the cuts were designed to be so painful they would force congress to come one a smarter way to trim the deficit instead but it didn't happen. house republicans poind out they passed a bill to replace the sequester with cuts to federal worker pay, food stamps and other programs. democrats say that puts the burden on poor and middle class americans to pay for debt reduction. >> remember the american people still believe by an overwhelming margin that the rich should contribute to this. >> reporter: republicans argue democrats have no plan for replacing the sequester beyond eliminating tax breaks for corporate jet owners and oil companies. >> these aren't real solutio
a food seal defense for a clean mouth and kills bacteria for fresh breath. ♪ fixodent, and forget it. i'd like to thank eating right, whole grain, multigrain cheerios! mom, are those my jeans? [ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain tend to weigh less than those who don't. multigrain cheerios >>> first of all, our object is not to be for the establishment. it's to be for the most >>> first of all, our object is not to be for the establishment. it's to be for the most conservative candidate who could win. this is not tea party versus establishment. >> welcome back to "hardball." at his peak he was called bush's brain and the architect, but today our own howard fineman wrote, karl rove is done. rove's new effort to back conservative candidates who he thinks can win has incited a civil war. gop bigwigs like rove who would like to move past primaries that brought them losses and the likes of o'donnell, angle, akin, and mourdock. tea party types are outraged that rove would try to insert himself into the democratic process. matt kibbe is president of the tea party group freed
, particularly younger ones, who say let's cut the defense budget, let those automatic spending cuts take place, and there are lots of senior republicans who say, not so fast. so that's going to be a problem within the republican party as we look ahead. >> where does karl rove and his new super pac fit into that? >> did you ever think republicans would call him a rhino, republican in name only. here you go. i've always thought of karl rove as a conservative. what's going on is his pac has said, you know what, we are tired of someone associated with his pac said to me, quote, the novelty of losing elections has worn off, and what they've decided to do is to start putting their money in primaries. they want to vet republican primary candidates so that by the time they get to the general election they believe they have qualified vetted candidates who can actually win. conservatives are saying, this is not what you should do. you need to let the process work itself out and american crossroads is saying, don't sacrifice ideological purity here. you can't worship at that. what you really need to do i
as a -- as what constitutes self defense for purposes of law. this is a very warped view of the law and it's something that because so much is at stake, lives of american citizens are at stake and all should be put in the hands and are being put in it hands of one person and even if you trust president obama with this power, they're setting it up for the future so that every president in the future will have this power to decide whether american citizen lives or dies. >> how much of a concern to you and my colleague andrea mitchell pointed this out that it's not that the white house is not taking this seriously but looking at the public sentiment and the lack of if you will outrage of the public, for example, that we're not seeing does that at all give you pause or is it in your view that people don't quite understand that this is not about this administration, this is about other administrations and looking down the line here? >> oh, i think if you were to poll today and by next week, i think things are very different. i think things are really changing this week and in large part due to
like to ask would you be as public into condemning the program as you were in its defense, and, in other words, would you set the record straight? >> i will do whatever possible to make sure that the record is straight and that i speak fully and honestly on it. >> i want to return to a question that mr. udall asked you. would you object to, and if so, why, to a public release to a declassified version of the committee's report? >> i would give such a request for declassification every consideration. there is a lot of information and those volumes with a lot of potential consequences as far as its public release. at the same time that we have a commitment to take care to, we also have a tremendous commitment to making sure that we keep this country safe by protecting its secrets. there are a lot of equities and operational activities, and it has to be looked at carefully. >> i would just say i agree with you that sources and methods and many of the operational details absolutely should never be declassified, but there is some basic principles in that report that i think is gonna
and representatives do, and i admire that clarity and that honesty. i think he may not be a defense intellectual. he may not have the broad management experience of some of our previous secretaries of defense, but he's not an ideologue. he will give the president sober advice about how, when, and why we should project our military force abroad. >> and as a former enlisted man, he will be able to relate to the tens of thousands of young troops who are being demobilized over the next few years and are coming home with some real problems and with a need for jobs and housing and other things like that. >> from the very start republicans warned they would try to make hagel seem like an anti-semite. look at what one republican aide told "the weekly standard." this was back in december. quote, send us hagel, and we will make sure every american knows he is an anti-semite. we was referring to this quote, and it's gotten outsized attention since hagel was floated as the nominee. it comes from the interview, aaron, that you did back in 2006 for your book "the much too promised land." most people only highligh
on a spending plan. the troops usually are happy to see defense secretary leon panetta, smiles and handshakes all around. but days before he leaves office, panetta has bad news. he's proposing less money in their paycheck next year. panetta, a savvy washington operative in budget politics, is leaving it to congress to figure out how not to cut pay and keep thousands of defense employees on the job. >> we will furlough as many as 800,000 d.o.d. civilians around the country for up to 22 days. they could face a 20% cut in their salary. you don't think that's going to impact on our economy? >> but the recommendation to slow the military pay raise will put troops in the middle of that political fight between congress and the president over spending. >> he should be looking out for soldiers, sailors, airmen marines that he sends into harm's way. >> panetta is proposing just a 1% increase in troop pay for 2014. according to internal pentagon calculations, it should have been at least 1.7%, which was the increase this year. it may not be a huge deduction, but it's badly needed cash for strapped milit
but what about what a secretary of defense is confronting today? what about the war in afghanistan? what about the war on terrorism? what about the budget sequester? >> ruth, what do you think, does panetta have a point there? >> i think he totally has a point. i think that the thing that was striking about the hague will confirmation hearing was the really poor performance on both sides. yes, the nominee did a terrible job answering entirely predictable questions and handling those, but also, the senators did a predictable but also very poor job of probing seriously his views, not just what he said in the past, but his views on the various things that will face the secretary of defense going forward. i think one thing that is likely to me is that despite his poor performance, he is going to be confirmed as secretary of defense, and so i would for one like to know some of the answers to those questions. >> so one of the possibilities here, this is more about optics, david brooks suggesting that chuck hagel simply go to the president and ask do you still want me after that appearance. her
: defense secretary panetta warned that would be the least of it if the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration take effect at the beginning of march. the pentagon has to reduce spending by $46 billion in the remaining seven months of fiscal year 2013. >> if these cuts happen there will be a serious disruption in defense programs and a sharp decline in our military readiness. >> reporter: this army document says three-fourths of its combat brigades will have to delay their training for several months resulting in a failure to meet demands of the national military strategy by the end of this year. afraid it will have to take $18 billion out of its own budget the army has already stopped maintenance of 1,300 vehicles and 17,000 weapons. according to this document the air force would cut its overhauls of aircraft by one-third, with the result that some planes would have to be grounded. flying hours for air force pilots would be cut by 18%. >> it puts at risk our fundamental mission of protecting the american people. >> reporter: combat operations in afgha
, regardless of republican or democrat, joint chiefs of staff, entire defense department says we need to do this unless we are in imminent danger, and you're okay with a judge saying no, final judge and jury, a judge going against the commander in chief, against the entire defense department in saying this is not an imminent threat? >> first of all, i'd get rid of the imminent. it's nonsensical. we don't have the kind of actionable intelligence to know whether it's imminent? let's just put that aside. we need a process which, by the way, i would take the president out of -- i am shocked that the president would be involved in the kind of tactical decisions on this. i would have something with military intelligence, maybe one independent person. it's got to be a very high bar. we do not ever want to usealier. let's get real here. that we are involved in a global war on terror. these are people who want to kill americans. you don't want to set up criteria or set the bar so high that we essentially tie ourselves in knots. like everything else in life, this is tough calls, this is balance. i th
we take the drone program and put it under the defense department, which would give a little bit more accountability and transparency to this, or keep it as part of the cia and the defense department, and i think that's a big policy question that's going forward. i in addition i think the president does have to be more forthcoming about how he conducts his program going forward because he understands, i believe, that he can't set a precedent for future presidents, that there has to be some legal bondries for the stuff that he is doing. if not, there's going to be a lot of outcry and call for disclosure. >> radiki, it's funny we have to keep playing this "daily show" clip. first and foremost, the decision to talk about drones and actually your accountability on "the daily show" relating to national security is one thing, but if you actually think about who the president is and who we presume him to be, i mean, he has come a long way from where he was even as a senator in the u.s. congress, his position on civil liberties issues and national security issues there. buzz feed points out o
is a near-certain double dip recession if more than a trillion dollars in automatic spending and defense cuts are allowed to occur at the beginning of next month. and while the president is busy running the government, today nominating a new candidate for the interior department. and yesterday pleading for action to prevent the so-called sequester, republicans have been out front telling anyone who will listen that they, too, are absolutely opposed to any cuts to military and discretionary spending. >> i don't like the sequester. i think it's taking a meat ax to our government. a meat ax to many programs, and it will weaken our national defense. >> however, just to be clear, speaker boehner says that he will not allow any new revenues to prevent the ax from falling. and he's not alone. congressman tom cole of oklahoma says we just had additional revenue for the federal government, so i don't see any way in the world the sequester won't happen. not to be outdone, tom rooney of florida says it seems that a large portion of our conference is resigned to the fact that sequestration is okay.
money than a stranger, you need an ally. ally bank. your money needs an ally. rick: outgoing defense secretary leon panetta defending the administration's response during the benghazi terror attack during a senate committee yesterday. we covered it live. things were getting a little tense when senator lindsey graham asked mr. panetta a simple question. >> who was in charge in benghazi? were you in charge, secretary panetta? >> what do you mean in charge? >> as running the operation, trying to find a way to save our ambassador who was lost. trying to prevent our people from being killed? providing assistance to people who were underattack? >> i mean, it's not that simple. as you know. i think the people that were in charge with the people on the ground. >> would you say secretary clinton in charge. >> pardon me? >> was secretary clinton in charge. >> the people in charge, were the ambassador there at benghazi. >> no. but, they can't, you know, they were trying to save their lives. rick: richard grenell, a former spokesperson for the last four u.s. ambassadors to the u.n. byron york, i
implicit bias and help shift with them from being on the defensive of the legislation that really decriminalizes a number of nonviolent offenses that come with mandatory sentencing, for example. so how do we deal with that? how do we talk to the counterparts that want to do the right thing but they say we know some populations are going to benefit directly from this. >> as a former legislature i wouldn't negotiate during the time of budget. we know when the other side of the ogle wants to get their money or they want to get some projects past year should have that list of things you want to get done for your people and that is a sign that the negotiation is done on budget time. you use the opportunity to get what you want into the negotiation around budget time. >> what about the negro's? there is the negro factor. >> representative miller of memphis tennessee to get my questions are on the same line as the last speaker. when we talk about implicit racism and or by as institutionalized, the first place we should look at is our federal government, the largest governmental instituti
before cutting to defense and nondefense discretionary programs. cuts to jobs programs and medical research and education. cuts to military personnel and law enforcement. cuts that will cause jobs and do real harm to the american economy as it struggles to recover. and the reality is that we don't even have that much time. we only have nine legislative days left in february to address the issue. nine days to negotiate a trillion-dollar deal with the senate and the president. and instead of a meaningful plan to address the crisis that we need to avert, we have this nonsense before us today. this is no way to govern. the disturbing truth is that many republicans seem downright giddy when it comes to the sequester cuts. there is new story after new story of how we'll let the sequester take effect. the gentleman from georgia, dr. price, couldn't support these cuts fast enough. i was shocked. mr. speaker, it was only last week that the economic numbers for the fourth quarter of 2012 were released. unexpectedly we saw a contraction in those numbers, a contraction fueled by a massive redu
hagel will have to wait a little while longer before take up his new position as secretary of defense. the senate armed services committee had hoped to hold a vote as soon as today but now that's being delayed. after last week's hearing republicans say they want more information on hagel's speeches and his financial disclosures. until then they are opposing the vote but the committee chair is still hoping to schedule one as soon as possible. in idaho, a republican state senator is introducing a bit of an obscure bill requiring every single high school student to read ayn rand's novel. when asked why he chose that particular book, senator john getty said it because it made his son become a republican. he said it gives high schools an alternative way to adopt graduation requirements. he does not plan on making a hard push for the bill or holding any hearings on that proposal. back on the national front military services are outlining their plan for a serz of spending -- series of spending cuts kicking in march 1st. sequester calls for $1.2 trillion in cuts over the next decade. that mea
forces farewell tribute today in honor of defense secretary lienon panetta. he will be at joint base myer henderson at 4:00 this afternoon. this is the formal goodbye for panetta stepping down from his position. yesterday, he testified over the attacks in benghazi where he revealed there was no advanced warning for those attacks. he said that factor plus the time and distance involved prevented the u.s. military from reaching the consulate before four americans were killed. panetta also confirmed he personally broke the news to president obama the night of the attack but that the two did not speak the rest of the evening as the assault continued to unfold. the president had told panetta to do whatever he needed to do to protect our people out in benghazi. today, house democrats wrap up their annual retreat with a little comedy. stephen colbert is speaking to the caucus thanks to an invite from nancy pelosi. after his comedy routine, pelosi will interview colbert in front of the house democrats. a spokesman said they assume this is colbert's attempt at a
for the defense of america. so i believe that the white house should have earlier than this actually exposed the criteria and, second, i think there needs to be a post-ex facto review of strikes to make sure nothing abusive and nothing is being steered wrongly as we continue on these strikes to defend -- >> again to the checks and balances. susan, i want to talk to you. there's a political whiplash going on because people you wouldn't expect to have the president's back on this do. senator lindsey graham coming out saying that he's totally supportive of this, the fact that if american citizens are going to be turned into al qaeda operatives, this is the right course. also john bolten saying it is entirely sensible that they should go ahead and have access to this type of program. is it surprising that republicans, especially vocal ones like a lindsey graham, john bolten, would support the president? >> it's not surprising at all. smft they ran a campaign in 2008 or as late as 2009 criticizing the bush white house and a lot of the tactics that were used. the president learned unless you were
to america's liberty because of his defense of his war powers, yet their hero stands on similar ground. how to resolve the contradiction? easy. conclude that they were wrong the first time. nia-malika, do you think we're hearing less outrage about this because it's coming from a president who is a democrat? >> in some ways i think that's right. in president obama you had someone who campaigned in wanting to turn the page in terms of foreign policy from the bush doctrine, from the bush era policies, but in many ways has followed them and has been handed this entire security apparatus, this particular program began in 2004, about 400 strikes have happened so far. about 3,000 people have been killed, mostly pakistan, somali, yemen. but you have had this sort of deafening silence for the most part from progressives and liberals around this. you have had a few voices certainly on the hill and even on your network to raise questions about it, but by and large, the president has been given something of a pass. i think also the public has moved beyond this in some ways. there's a post-9/11 new norm
defensible than the path of wasteful and irresponsible spend we can have been on for decades. working families should come first. everybody agrees a fairer, simpler tax code would give all of us more time. in our attempt to make the tax code simpler, we must continue to demonstrate support for young parents who invest in having kids, and raising a family, because after all, they are america's most valued investors. in 1997, a republican congress created the child tax credit, specifically to help ease the financial burden of families raising children. in 2001, it was expanded. such a policy helped to limit the size of government and results in fewer americans looking to the government for support. now, leading up to april 15th, families will be besieged byern cozy over taxes, but it's health care economic the concern for a healthy family that always worries parents most. most americans have come to expect the besthawkhawk -- best health care in the world bus our system is too complex and too costly. president obama's law raised premiums and has made access to health care tougher. if we
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 91 (some duplicates have been removed)